Here is what I get when I run the test: My table is defined as ComplianceRule but for just this particular test it is coming out as [Compliance Rules]. I've found the methods that split the word trying to determine an alias but WHY is it happening?
<pre>

Here is what I get when I run the test: My table is defined as ComplianceRule but for just this particular test it is coming out as [Compliance Rules]. I've found the methods that split the word trying to determine an alias but WHY is it happening?

Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at codeplex.com

This e-mail is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you
must not use, disclose or distribute this e-mail without the author's prior permission. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this message.
We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. Any views and/or opinions expressed in this e-mail are of the author only and do not represent the views of Epicor Software Corporation or any other company within its group.

yeah, thats exactly how I have it setupnew UpdateableTable<ComplianceRule>(myProvider, “ComplianceRule”);
and I've tried it with both UpdateableTable and QueryableTable. It must be a 'feature' because I've noticed that the feature exists in LINQPad also to 'Pluralize EntitySet and Table properties, but there at least it's an optional feature.
Still, this is a pretty interesting project and hopefully it continues to grow.

Are you compiling the query using QueryCompiler.Compile()? I can duplicate the problem by compiling the query, but only in the “isolated” mode (see NorthwindExecutionTest.cs
for examples) where the class holding the record type is provided as an argument. It fails executing for test6 below – the others work fine.

yeah, thats exactly how I have it setupnew UpdateableTable<ComplianceRule>(myProvider, “ComplianceRule”);
and I've tried it with both UpdateableTable and QueryableTable. It must be a 'feature' because I've noticed that the feature exists in LINQPad also to 'Pluralize EntitySet and Table properties, but there at least it's an optional feature.
Still, this is a pretty interesting project and hopefully it continues to grow.

Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at codeplex.com

This e-mail is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you
must not use, disclose or distribute this e-mail without the author's prior permission. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this message.
We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. Any views and/or opinions expressed in this e-mail are of the author only and do not represent the views of Epicor Software Corporation or any other company within its group.

yeah, thats exactly how I have it setupnew UpdateableTable<ComplianceRule>(myProvider, “ComplianceRule”);
and I've tried it with both UpdateableTable and QueryableTable. It must be a 'feature' because I've noticed that the feature exists in LINQPad also to 'Pluralize EntitySet and Table properties, but there at least it's an optional feature.
Still, this is a pretty interesting project and hopefully it continues to grow.

Please note: Images and attachments will be removed from emails. Any posts to this discussion will also be available online at codeplex.com

This e-mail is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you
must not use, disclose or distribute this e-mail without the author's prior permission. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this message.
We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. Any views and/or opinions expressed in this e-mail are of the author only and do not represent the views of Epicor Software Corporation or any other company within its group.

This is a behavior I put in the implicit mapping object. The primary goal of this mapping object was to get Northwind database to somewhat work. You can either switch to using the new attribute or xml based mapping or devise your own variant.